Institutional and organizational changes

4.1.2.1. Credit facility

With regard to credit facilities, about 72 and 62% of the sample respondents reported that they received credit in 2008/2009 production season at Alaba and Dale, respectively. All of participants (100%) at Alaba and 86% at Dale had received credit as compared to non-participants, which are about 24% at Alaba and 38% at Dale.

The main problem in getting credit as reported by 60% of the respondents was limited source and inadequacy of credit. In line with the above problem, 40% of respondents’ rate credit availability and accessibility as poor at Alaba. The difference in rating credit availability between participant and non-participants was significant at 10% level. The major source of credit for non-participants is microfinance institution which account for 40% of the total credit received. The type of credit dominantly provided by microfinance was reported to be cash credit. On the other hand, participants received input credit from IPMS project indirectly.

About 50 and 43% of participants received credit from IPMS project in kind like haricot bean seed and pullets both at Alaba and Dale, respectively.

Project participants indicated that the IPMS project has contributed much in availing input credit in kind both at Alaba and Dale study sites. At Alaba, the project has provided bee hive,

haricot bean seed and three months old chicken. Similarly at Dale haricot bean seed and pullets of day old were supplied in kind via credit by the project in collaboration with other institutions like ‘Weinenata’ local co-operative, Melkasa and Awassa Agricultural research centers and WoA. This indicates that the project has brought about a change in institutional aspect; typically credit availability via creating linkage among farmers, concerned institutions (Research and extension) and local cooperative. Moreover, the project has strengthened the co-operative, ‘Weinenata’, capacity by providing financial (loan) support.

4.1.2.2 Agricultural extension service

Agricultural extension services provided by agricultural development offices are believed to be important sources of information about new and improved agricultural technologies. About 99% of the sample respondents in Alaba and all respondents in Dale reported that they have contact with agricultural extension agents and get technical advice thereof, either in-groups or individually (Table 15). To this end the project has been strengthening the service by providing short and medium (B.Sc. and M.Sc.) training to the development agents as well as the experts so that they are able to give better service to the farmers. Moreover, the project involves in strengthening linkage among the institutions which are supposed to work together:

research institutions, extension and farmers. It has also been providing the FTCs with necessary equipment like satellite dish, television, computers, chairs, tables, electric power supply and CDs to facilitate the farmers training program. Furthermore, the project introduces new ways of agricultural practices and technologies to the respective sites.

Table 15 Extension contact

Extension contact

District

Alaba Dale Participants

Non-participants Total Participants

Non-participants Total

N % N % N % N % N % N %

Have contact 50 100 49 98 99 98 50 100 50 100 100 100 Have no Contact 0 0 1 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0

4.1.2.3. Farmers organization

At Alaba, most of the respondents had no membership to formal organizations other than Peasants Association (PA). As it can be seen from Table 16, about 74% of the respondents were not members to any formal organizations at Alaba site. When one compare membership to formal organization other than PA between the two farmers group the proportion is more for participants (36%) than for non-participants (16%) at Alaba site. This shows that formal farmer-institutions, which may serve as important information and input sources on agricultural technologies, were not well established in this particular study area though membership proportion seems better for participants.

With the initiative of the IPMS project, currently there is a start of organizing farmers in to cooperatives based on the commodities of intervention in collaboration with the WCPO. This is line with the information obtained from WCPO which indicates that currently there are about 2 operatives particularly on Teff seed multiplication and apiculture; similarly, 2 co-operatives are on the process of establishment on poultry and haricot bean seed multiplication with the initiative of the IPMS project for its intervention commodities. Furthermore, there is input shop which is functional by co-operative named ‘Mencheno’ at Alaba. This particular shop supplies important farm inputs such as fertilizer, herbicides, etc at a relatively reasonable price and better quality and the project provides innovative credit so that the shop is able to supply quality and timely inputs. Moreover, the project has trained private farmers to give paravet and crop protection services.

At Dale, there is a well organized co-operative named ‘Weinenata’ which is operational throughout the woreda. Formerly, this co-operative has been functional only on coffee marketing. However, the co-operative has widened its scope to haricot bean through the encouragement and support of the IPMS project. The project has given financial support and created a link to the important institutions which can provide the full package to the targeted commodity. As a result of these, the cooperative has started to handle the different marketing functions like storage, grading, labeling, packaging, etc of improved haricot bean seed which is collected from farmers and to be sold for them at different amount (packagels) when they need. Speaking differently, the project has facilitated input divisibility to farmers as per their

demand. This, in turn, indicates that the project has brought about organizational and institutional changes in input marketing.

Table 16 Membership to formal organization

Membership

With regard to market information, the market intervention has included market information delivery system through billboard and loud speakers at Alaba and through DAs at Dale.

Accordingly, about 84% of respondents know and get market information on input and output price using the bill board directly and indirectly at Alaba. Of those who have access to the bill board information, about 20% of respondents reported that IPMS has brought benefit to them in providing market information. Owing to price information delivered, farmers reported that they are able to reduce frequency and cost of transportation as they only go once to the market and sale their product to the market by the indicated price with no hesitation.

However, of those who know the market information delivery system, about 80% face a problem in using the information from the billboard due to illiteracy.

In addition, the project promotes new practices and technologies at the market place using loud speaker. From this about 60% of respondents are informed about the message delivered by the project using the speaker. Furthermore, the intervention has included balance calibration at hot pepper market which increases farmers benefit, enables them to make informed decision and saves them from being cheated. Whereas at Dale, even though there is no practice of using the above means of market information delivery systems, the project trains the DAs and experts of MoARD on market orientation related issues to support and advise farmers about market oriented production and give market information.